![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Reviewer: Jezhotwells ( talk) 18:18, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
I shall be reviewing this article against the
Good Article criteria, following its
nomination for Good Article status.
OK, I would like the concerns above to be addressed and then I will take a further look and go through the references thoroughly. On hold Jezhotwells ( talk) 19:28, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
Grunge6910 voiced a couple of months ago that being how influential Said and his works have been in a number of fields, the importance rating seems low, a "High" rating seeming more fitting. I agree, though I don't know what actions we can take to get this reassessed.-- Abie the Fish Peddler ( talk) 01:36, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
The administrator has suggested doing something different with the bibliography section. I concur, though I'd like to create a stub, Edward Said bibliography, in the same vein as the article Woody Allen filmography. I shall create the article and make the move. Feel free to revert me and discuss here, if you disagree. Good day to you! -- Abie the Fish Peddler ( talk) 08:19, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
References #12, #16, and #17 are just bare URLs, need properly formatting in a manner consistent with the rest. #59, #60, #63, and #67 are also.
Ref #35 is a dead link; and footnote #2 is a dead link.
And one "citation needed" needs to be handled.
These are the only issues that stand in the way of the article passing its "Good Article" status qualification. I can try to take care of the "citation needed" tomorrow, but the references are not my strong suit, especially since I am the one who inserted most of those bare URLs in there. I'm not really sure of the proper formatting. So, if you do know the proper formatting, please feel free to implement it. I wouldn't be asking like this, except for the fact that the administrator left a note on my talk page saying that we have one week to complete these changes or the article will fail. Have a good day!--
Abie the Fish Peddler (
talk)
03:35, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
A few paragraphs could use references, and the lede paragraph needs expanding that accurately and summarily reflects the article. :-) -- Abie the Fish Peddler ( talk) 06:59, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
I was going to nominate the article myself after reading it. I'm certain that it will most likely pass. Sir Richardson ( talk) 00:23, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
Edward Said is now a "GOOD article". Good work, everyone! -- Abie the Fish Peddler ( talk) 02:44, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
I think we should expand the "Lectures and intervews online" section with the first three listings under "External links". Since those first three listings are articles written by Said, I think the title "Lectures and interviews online" should be renamed accordingly, possibly to "Said online", or even better "Lectures, interviews, and articles".-- Abie the Fish Peddler ( talk) 02:42, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Refs #16 through 20 need formatting. In addition, I propose an expansion of the "Career" section. Here is a rough draft. I'm curious what you all think about it.-- Abie the Fish Peddler ( talk) 20:06, 14 January 2010 (UTC):
It seems that this article is not very neutral, as the "Criticism" section is almost half of the full length! No other article of a contemporary or related philosopher seems to have as long of a section on criticism. Can we have some parity please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.85.29.132 ( talk) 21:14, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
Career
Professorship
In 1963, Said joined the faculty of Columbia University, in the departments of English and Comparative Literature, where he would serve until his death in 2003. In 1974 he was Visiting Professor of Comparative Literature at Harvard, in 1975-6 Fellow of the Center for Advanced Study in Behavioral Science at Stanford, and in 1977, Said became the Parr Professor of English and Comparative Literature at Columbia and subsequently became the Old Dominion Foundation Professor in the Humanities. In 1979, Said was Visiting Professor of Humanities at Johns Hopkins University. [1] Said was also a visiting professor at Yale University and lectured at more than 100 universities. [2] In 1992, he attained the rank of University Professor, Columbia's highest academic position. [3]
Periodical contributions
Said's writing regularly appeared in The Nation, [4] The Guardian, [4] the London Review of Books, [5] Le Monde Diplomatique, [6] Counterpunch, [7] Al Ahram, [8] and the pan-Arab daily al-Hayat. In addition to his contributions as writer, he served as an editor for the Arab Studies Quarterly, [4] The themes of his writings included literature, politics, the Middle East, music, and culture.
Various Associations
Said also served as president of the Modern Language Association, and was a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, the executive board of PEN, the American Academy of Arts and Letters, the Royal Society of Literature, the Council of Foreign Relations, [9] and the American Philosophical Society. [10]
Late years
In September 1991, through a routine medical checkup, Said discovered that he had leukemia, which led him to write his acclaimed memoir, Out of Place (1999), which he began work on in 1994. Though he had been given little time to live, Said continued teaching, traveling, lecturing, and authoring seven books, as well as writing the material for two posthumous works, including On Late Style in which he critiqued the later works of authors, filmmakers and musicians. Of his frame of mind during his post-prognosis days, Said commented: "I don't think that I was ever consciously afraid of dying, though I soon grew aware of the shortage of time." [11]
References
In an interview he stated his mother was half Lebanese, http://www.counterpunch.org/said2.html Im adding this ♥Yasmina♥ ( talk) 12:07, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Yes i was lucky to find this,I remember hearing him say it in an interview ages ago but i dont think i could find the link to that.Its important to add that its Through his GRANDMOTHER the Lebanese ancestry is from on his mother side because the way Arab world works is its a Patriarchal society where nationality and identity is passed through the father. If your father is Palestinian and your mother syrian you are labeled and identified thoroughly as a Palestinian even if you have been born in Syria and raised there. The father's identity is yours.Said even notes that himself when he states his mother's father was palestinian and yet shes half Lebanese which is stating She is palestinian and that its her mother whose Lebanese. here,Weiner says that my mother was Lebanese, whereas she was only half Lebanese; her father was Palestinian. She had a Palestinian passport and in 1948 did in point of fact become a refugee. ♥Yasmina♥ ( talk) 21:48, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Sure no problem ♥Yasmina♥ ( talk) 07:20, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
An American with Lebanese heritage is deemed a Lebanese-American what is wrong with this? ♥Yasmina♥ ( talk) 19:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
Said was indeed born to a Christian family, but he did not believe in anything about it in his adult life. He was an agnostic in later life. He cannot be classified as a 'Christian', and he did not do that himself. 129.120.177.8 ( talk) 20:29, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
See: Edward Said: Secular Protestant. By Mark Walhout. Christianity Today. Published September 1, 2001.
If a person can be a secular non-believing Jew, and gain entry to Israel based on that fact, then I think it's more than fair to foreground Said's Christianity. For one thing, the persecution of the Palestinian is the persecution by Jews of Christians, whose world was destroyed in 1948. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.202.99.16 ( talk) 05:40, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
A recent edit attempted to add W. J. T. Mitchell to the "influenced" section; I'd add it but I'm worried that would be consider original research. But for that matter, under what reasoning are all the other names there? — Soap — 23:27, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
This is an inaccurate section. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Countering_systemic_bias Andycarr78 ( talk) 17:06, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
This section needs serious work. It is less about Said than about a conversation about him and is generally a tough slog in terms of readability. ( Clairemont ( talk) 07:16, 25 August 2012 (UTC))
BernardZ ( talk) 09:07, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
BernardZ ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 13:05, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
When Mr. Weiner resorted to personal attacks against Alon and Hitchens he demonstrated that character assassination was his purpose; therefore, the matter is moot. De mortuis nihil nisi bonum. Really, mate!
Regards,
Mhazard9 ( talk) 20:07, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
The Trouble with Quibbles
Edward Saïd had a human birth, not an Athenian birth, therefore, he, an infant, did not write his birth certificate, and thus did not list a Cairo residential address in that document . . . so . . . he did not lie about where his mother underwent parturition. He did attend the St George Academy of Jerusalem, whether or not he did so as either a FULL-TIME or as a PART-TIME student is a quibble especially unimportant, because other alumni recalled having seen him smoking cigarettes in the latrine. I do not know in which stall, nor do I know the brand of cigarettes; maybe it was the same brand of cigarettes as me . . . gosh, I really don't know. In the Big Picture of the things he explained, does it matter? I think not.
That Edward Saïd exaggerated was well known, that he lied, was unproved and remains unproven, yet, despite his humanity — foibles, defects, dandified grooming — the intellectual validity of his works remains faithful, true, and accurate to the facts as they exist in Palestine, Israel, the post-colonial world, and the academic world.
I respectfully recommend that you participate without an anonymous mask, show your Editorial Face, intellectual–editorial jousting is fun combat. Do not invest your emotions to the subject, choose to be dispassionate; difficult, but satisfying; stand by your contributions.
Regards,
Mhazard9 ( talk) 15:37, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
Referring to Justus Weiner's criticism of Said's biographical assertions as "character assasination," and attributing motivations like a "desire to undermine" Said's political activism to him are not the kind of objective journalistic tone that an encyclopedia entry should have.
Perhaps the article should have a neutrality disputed tag added?
Kamandi — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.232.28.75 ( talk) 01:45, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
Currently, the name "Mariam Saïd (née Cortas)" appears twice: both as Said's mother and as his wife/widow. Is this a strange coincidence or is one of the names wrong? Str1977 (talk) 19:48, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
Hi, the 'further reading' section has got a lot shorter from March 13 onwards. Why? U.K.L. — Preceding unsigned comment added by UKLonWikiLa ( talk • contribs) 15:38, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
This article is such an extreme whitewash of Edward Said that it reads like a paraody. Even the section supposedly offering an alternative point of view ("Personal Criticism") is not an attack upon Said - it is an attack (in absurd language) upon the critics of Edward Sard.
Edward Said was a liar. He lied about "orientalism" - pretending that "orientalists" were terrible Western attackers of oriental cultures, when they actually were defenders of these cultures as worthy of study. And Edward Said lied about his own life - pretending that his family were persecuted by Jews when they were acutally persecuted by Egyption Muslims.
Edward Said's life (his role in the cultrual Marxist project of "anti Imperialism", his connection to Barack Obama and....) could be an interesting subject for an article. But I do not expect to see such a factual article in the establishment leftist environment that is Wikipedia. 90.217.1.220 ( talk) 11:18, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
I agree with this, it a big problem with the wikipedia in general. BernardZ ( talk) 03:25, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
A thematically pertinent addendum
Hello Mhazard9. It looks like you are trying to make some improvements in this article, but you and User:BernardZ have been reverting each other. It is best if both of you participate at Talk:Edward Said to discuss the rationale for your changes. I have asked him to join in as well. Thanks, EdJohnston ( talk) 02:26, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
Response:
Dear Ed Johnston,
I agree, however, Mr. Bernard Z. is a (paid?) lobbyist-editor; his edit history is almost exclusively composed of deletions of anything critical of Israel; oy vey, what a thin skin! His insistence upon playing the "I just don't like it" game ("I WANT PROOF!) confirms this; review the Edward Saïd edit history. Especially in the personal criticism sub-section, Character Assassination, Mr. Bernard Z insists on deleting the substantiated topic sentence, derived from the text it introduces, which is supported with the sources he and the Editor Davidiad, another Israel lobbysist-editor, demanded that I provide for them. . . .
So, despite my having done their editorial work for them, they insist with the "I just don't like it" nonsense; thus, in good faith, I have restored the substantiated text, which was rated as a Good Article by disinterested editors. Personally, I think that the Character Assassination sub-section is irrelevant to Edward Saïd's biography and to the subject of Orientalism, because, IN REAL LIFE Counsellor Weiner's character-assassination claims proved untrue; thus my earlier recommendation of "a diligent reading" of the JOURNALISM sources — easy reading, especially for lobbyists.
In think, that, despite my having done the editorial work on that sub-section, its presence constitutes UNDUE WEIGHT to a very minor quibble, by a two-bit nobody-lawyer who has (since the late 1990s, when this "controversial" matter was "news") remained a two-bit schmoe. If you disbelieve me, review the discussion in the JUSTUS WEINER article; besides being briefly famous (for 14.99 mins.) for attacking the family of Edward Saïd, Weiner is inconsequential in Wikipedia, the U.S., and the world. Still, I shall restore the substantiated text, which faithfully, truthfully, and accurately depicts the falsity of Mr. Weiner and his claims.
Because Mr. Bernard Z is grinding an ideologic axe against Edward Saïd, witness his vandalism of substantiated text, he and I are engaged in a typically petty edit-war about his reactionary misrepresentation of an historical reality external to Wikipedia. Bernard Z's factual misrepresentations correspond with the misrepresentations of Justus Weiner, who, in turn, discredited himself almost twenty years ago.
Most recently, the Editor Sindinero recommended to Bernard Z that he should participate with FACTS; I agree with the recommendation. Meantime, I have restored the substantiated text of the Character Assassination sub-section, because it is faithful, true, and accurate to the biographic facts of the dead Edward Saĩd.
Moreover, I shall post this communication about the Edward Said biography to that Talk page.
Let me know.
Best regards,
Mhazard9 ( talk) 18:06, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
I had to read this book and i can testify of its anti-intellectualism and contrafactual claims — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:8388:8600:B080:616C:D12:E98F:92DD ( talk) 01:46, 13 April 2016 (UTC) ---
Does anyone have any sources at all that would support spelling Said's name "Saïd"? I've never seen this orthography used on a single work by Said; unless there is a good reason to do otherwise, these should be changed back to "Said" throughout this article. Sindinero ( talk) 18:06, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
Response:
The spelling of the man's name is such.
Regards,
Mhazard9 ( talk) 21:44, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
Whatever Weiner's motivations, we're not going to speculate on it beyond what the sources say--and we are certainly not going to call a section "character assassination". Drmies ( talk) 23:15, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
To whip this article back into shape, proper referencing is key. I'm no expert, but a system with a bibliography for books and regular footnotes for articles and websites is an easy enough thing to do, and it's a lot cleaner than the current situation. If anyone wants to jump to start using sfn or fancy stuff like that, they're welcome--for now I'm going to make a start by building a bibliography. Drmies ( talk) 00:11, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
According to the article, Said died in 2003. However, the music section has him publishing books in 2006 and 2007. Could someone please look into this? 122.148.39.138 ( talk) 11:23, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
Can someone please add to the Categories at the bottom - Classical music critics. He was the classical music critic for the Nation magazine.
108.244.74.98 (
talk)
06:08, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
This strikes me as biased, especially the wording of this. It seems to be cherrypicking of random unsubstantiated complaints. Thoughts anyone?
"Said felt the consequences of being a politically-militant, public intellectual in 1985: per Said, the Jewish Defense League compared Said to a Nazi because of his anti-Zionism; an arsonist set afire his office at Columbia University; he and his family were repeatedly targeted with death threats."
-- Bobjohnson111980 ( talk) 19:09, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
I think it's going too far to say that Said "redefined" the word, "orientalism". It would be more sensible to say that he used it a certain way. How else it might be used is hard to imagine. 172.56.3.109 ( talk) 00:24, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
The article in the commentary stirred up much interest and destroyed his credibility.
Also why nothing about the doubts that many professional historians have on his writings, for example Paul Johnson, called Said a “malevolent liar and propagandist, who has been responsible for more harm than any other intellectual of his generation.”
Why is the introduction five paragraphs? I can't figure out which part is not important enough to introduce readers. -- George Ho ( talk) 03:56, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
I see what you mean, it is too long and detailed for an introduction. I shall give it a go.
Chas. Caltrop ( talk) 13:01, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
I copy-edited the introduction to three paragraphs, about the academic, the public intellectual, and the politician. The off-topic text was boosterism (ethnic, national) and POV-pushing filler against the veracity of Said, himself, and of Orientalism, the book and the subject.
Furthermore, I think that the subsection "Criticism of Orientalism" should be deleted from this biography page, as irrelevant (to a biography) and redundant (all of it already is in the Orientalism page, verbatim), which duplication renders the subsection as POV-pushing; a re-direct link, to the criticism section of the Orientalism book page would suffice, in this biography page. I shall proceed to that. Let me know.
Regards,
Chas. Caltrop ( talk) 15:16, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
I agree with you, User:Eperoton, however, this is the biography of Edward Said, the author of the book Orientalism, yet, almost one-third of the text of this biographic article is complaints about the book — which has its own page, which reproduces all of the book-chat criticism present here. Moreover, the text I deleted from the lead, again, almost one-third of the introduction, consisted of book-chat complaints irrelevant to the biography, which is why another editor tagged it for factual correction. What do you think about such an imbalance? I think that such a textual imbalance in the Introduction to a biography, is POV-pushing, because all that text (not about the man) already is explicitly discussed in the book's page, Orientalism, where a full discussion of a book is relevant; here, the book-chat imbalances the biography, and comes across as axe-grinding by his enemies.
I propose to summarise the book-chat as a small part, not one-third, of this biographical article, and redirect the reader to the book page for full discussion. Would you agree or disagree with this proposal?
Also, please be specific, because: "It doesn't seem to be properly sourced" is too vague. What do you mean to say? Specific examples of factual problems (section, subsection, paragraph, line, and sentence) will facilitate our collaboration, because I have not touched the sources, so you must specify where you found a factual problem.
Regards,
Chas. Caltrop ( talk) 17:06, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
I concur, let us soldier on, and chat accordingly.
Regards,
Chas. Caltrop ( talk) 04:16, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
I'm just clarifying some questions about Edward Said. I hope to learn some things in the process. I had taken out the bolded mention of Said's full name in the body. I cited WP:LASTNAME (which says to use the full name on the first mention - which is in the lead - and only the last name subsequently, unless there's some reason to suspect that confusion would result from doing that). I also think that MOS:BOLD is pretty clear (after describing the use of bold in the lead or to redirects to specific sections, it says, "Use boldface in the remainder of the article only in a few special cases.") I'm thinking that it's redundant to describe a polyglot who speaks three languages, just like it wouldn't be necessary to characterize someone as a bilingual individual who speaks English and Spanish.
These seemed like straightforward changes, and I would usually make them without a second thought (or would suggest them to an editor during a Good Article review - which this article has already passed). I figure that most people don't revert changes just for fun, so I must be failing to consider one or more points with these edits. Can you let me know what those are? I appreciate it - and your work to keep one of our Good Articles up to standard. EricEnfermero ( Talk) 21:42, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
Yes, but, as you pointed out: it is optional (one or the other), and I exercised that option as a common sense, formal beginning to the biography. The Introduction (the lead, in newspaper jargon) is separate and apart from the biography proper. Without the Introduction, the biography article should be complete, in itself, therefore the full name of the subject is indicated; after all, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a newspaper, so, spelling out the facts is the norm in encyclopedic writing. You need not believe me, fetch a newspaper or a magazine and compare that loose language (filler between adverts) to the Standard language of an encyclopedia article; thus, our war of reverts was for nought.
Moreover, in real life, parents usually do not address their child by surname, usually by name: Baby Edward or Baby Said? Common sense trumps the rulebook, it is in the MOS explanations. Therefore, in my experience, the changes, from a full name to a surname, tend to be edit-war provocations in behalf of a third party (usually an important Somebody with a public image to protect); your editorial contributions history supports my opinion. As you might know or might not know, the Wikipedia MOS recommends editorial common sense in producing an article, rather than the martinet’s supremacy of the rules over reality: the factual content of the biography of Edward W. Said.
If you are legitimately interested, follow up.
Cheers,
Chas. Caltrop ( talk) 22:54, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
I must clarify an unintentional ambiguity that might have lead you to conflate my topics. You, EricEnfermero, I believe, are not acting in behalf of any third party, I meant other, regular-orbit trolls in the pages I edit. Yet, your contributions indicate that you know the difference, between encyclopaedic writing and journalistic writing styles. The differences between the initial sentences, Edward W. Said was born to. . . . and Said was born to. . . . are obvious, thus, the reference to infant names.
There is nothing to regret, such quarrels are the norm in the editorial-part of publishing. An objective eye always is welcome.
Cheers,
Chas. Caltrop ( talk) 02:25, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
@ Nishidani: To the extent that we want to cover the Lewis-Said spat, which is a notable controversy, in the Criticism of Orientalism section, it should be a NPOV representation of Lewis' criticism of Orientalism and a NPOV representation of Said's criticism of Lewis or of his response to Lewis. What we have now is one sentence and quote for Said's criticism of Lewis, followed by a paragraph summarizing Said's criticism of Lewis' response, followed by one sentence noting Said's criticism of Lewis again and mentioning that Lewis wrote some essays about it. There's some unintentional comedy here. If we want to keep Said's quote about Lewis, Lewis needs to get at least one statement in of his own. A good candidate is the one chosen in the NYT obituary of Said: "The tragedy of Mr. Said's `Orientalism' [...] is that it takes a genuine problem of real importance and reduces it to the level of political polemic and personal abuse." We can't use Said's characterization of Lewis' view as a stand-in for Lewis' view, since it's obviously not a NPOV account. Eperoton ( talk) 21:58, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 15 external links on Edward Said. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 23:48, 20 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Edward Said. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 21:52, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Edward Said has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Existing text under Early Life: Edward’s mother, Hilda Said was born Lebanese and raised in Nazareth, Palestine.[17]
Point: Nazareth is not in Palestine NOW as that state does not exist, so leaving the text as is suggests a political bias which is inaccurate - most people would not be aware of the differences between a historically conceived Palestine full of Jews and Arabs (ie. whoever came from that bit of land) and the current movement to create a Palestinian state where Arabs live under their own politically designated flag.
Moreover, historically, there has never been a country called Palestine as an integral nation state. The British occupied the region and ruled it under what is known as the Palestinian Mandate and it was they who called the area Palestine, but note carefully that this was to include ALL of the inhabitants of the area. Prior to 1920, which most importantly is the time that Said's mother would have been born and raised (she would have had to be 15 or so to have had Said who was born in 1935 according to your wikipage), the Turks occupied it but the land was never labelled Palestine as a single administrative unit, instead it was called “Kudüs-i Şerif” (Jerusalem), “Nablus” and “Akka” (Acre). (ref https://www.quora.com/What-was-the-land-of-Israel-called-before-1948)
Instead say: Edward’s mother, Hilda Said was born Lebanese and raised in Nazareth, now Occupied Territory, Israel. Icedtea&cake ( talk) 09:31, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Edward Said has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Eward W. Said's, excellent book "Peace and its Discontents" ISBN 0-679-76725-8 is missing in the reference section, and should be added. Editor : "Vintage Books" a Division of Random House, Inc., New York (London 1995).
Please add this important book, and allow me to use some sections as valuable references. Andre Gompel, Sept 21, 2018 agompel ( talk) 18:12, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
I kindly request authorized users to add the article to Category:Theorists on Western civilization and Category:Cultural historians. The two apply because one of Said's work (notably Orientalism and Culture and Imperialism) main topics is the "general pattern of relationships between the modern metropolitan west and its overseas territories" (Said, Edward (1993). Culture and Imperialism. New York: Vintage Books (Random House). p. xi.), with a focus on representations of the Orient in Western culture. Thank you in advance, Fa suisse ( talk) 05:51, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Edward Said has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change "Be and his..." to "He and his..." Wikiclear ( talk) 16:12, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Edward Said has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
External link: Finding aid to Edward Said papers at Columbia University. Rare Book & Manuscript Library. Hazzardcu ( talk) 19:26, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
There has been some controversy over whether he was born in Jerusalem. Additionally, wouldn't it be more correct to say he was of mixed heritage, including Palestinian... he WAS not just Palestinian. 128.193.12.16 ( talk) 03:48, 28 February 2010 (UTC) 2010/02/28
I added an article that cites Mandatory government records about land ownership and birth. The article has a bias, as evidenced by the title, and there were at least several published responses, which I leave for other editors to examine and consider citing. The 1999 article in Commentary supports the claim of birth in Jerusalem, citing a birth certificate. MichelleInSanMarcos ( talk) 15:36, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
Really? You are going to revisit that nonsense? Save yourself the headache and heartache of anti-intellectualism . . . of accusing a dead man of lying . . . about his infancy? Review the 2013 editorial-history of the article, there you shall find the original, non-starter arguments to this trash-can fire.
Are you bored? Why not just dig up Said's corpse and punch it to pieces? I am fascinated by how this dead public intellectual so hurts the real-world feelings of right-wing ghouls.
I shall follow you people in The Hunt for the Real Edward W. Said!
So, shhhhhhhhhhh, I'll be quiet while you're hunting Pawsetinians, O.K.?
Good Luck.
Chas. Caltrop ( talk) 19:37, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
Said was born and grew up as a devout Christian Egyptian. The lawyer Justus Weiner's detailed 1999 article in Commentary Magazine has never been debunked. Said's birth certificate states he was born in Jerusalem but also notes his home address as Cairo. Indeed, the infant Said returned to Cairo shortly after birth.
Said never attended St George's School in Jerusalem as a child as he claims -- Weiner inspected all the school's class lists for the relevant years and Said's name is nowhere to be found. It was his father Wadie Said who grew up in Jerusalem and enrolled in St George's.
Said is a complete phony. All of these inventions of Said are once again restated and outlined in detail in a brand new article in the current New Criterion (The Invented Exile of Edward Said, Keith Windschuttle, The New Criterion, September 2021, pages 50-56).
This Wikipedia article is a joke. Christian B Martin ( talk) 21:03, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
Should we add the category Category:Muslim apologists to this article? There is a similar discussion happening at Talk:John_Esposito#Incorrect_removal_of_Category:Muslim_apologists. The evidence presented in favor of such a categorization are two quotes:
We will also look at responses to these perspectives from Apologists like Said with his accusation that Orientalism stems from xenophobia and Esposito, who identifies aspects of Islam from which could spring democracy. from E-International Relations
Prominent apologists include Edward Said, Franz Fanon, John Esposito...in America’s War against Global Jihad, page 247
I'm not completely sure such a categorization would be appropriate. The sources seem somewhat biased. What do others think? Pinging last few people who engaged in discussion here: @ Chas. Caltrop:, @ Eperoton:, @ Nishidani:, @ MichelleInSanMarcos:, @ Fa suisse:, sorry if I missed anyone. VR talk 00:42, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
(UTC)
The truth is that Said was a Nazi and you probably are as well. See, others can do it too - you don’t have a monopoly on emotionalistic talking-down. Behave like an adult. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8802:5700:E2E:51FF:DB26:478C:B0E6 ( talk) 03:27, 6 October 2020 (UTC)